There will never be 100% perfection 100% of the time.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Self-Driving Car Needed a Realignment After Clipping Curb in Autonomous Mode
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm hoping that Apple takes the smart move and licenses their technology to existing car makers, instead of trying to build a car themselves.
It’s weird to me what a big deal some people make of every autonomous driving accident. It’s not realistic to expect perfection from autonomous vehicles, but if they can be better than human driven cars in terms of rate of accident (and perhaps more importantly, serious accident), then that’s worthwhile.
It’s sad that this could be very true. An autonomous vehicle will never be better than one driven by an alert,smart and good human driver. Computers can never be proactive like a good alert human driver can. A computer will always be reactive. Problem is people are F stupid.
From an auto safety perspective, I see no need for additional regulations. Tesla doesn't share all the fine details, but they do publish aggregate safety data on a quarterly basis which shows autopilot is significantly safer than a human alone.
Journalism could use some regulation if you were mislead by an article you read.
People argue that Tesla's marketing misleads people, but... IDK - Tesla explains what their system does today vs what it'll do in the future pretty clearly. If you want to argue that marketing future capabilities shouldn't be allowed, then that would suggest that preorders, kickstarters, etc, shouldn't be legal either.
Tesla is rear ending firetrucks, Apple is clipping curbs...
I'm sure that's not enough data to make a determination from, but if it's all I have then I don't think it supports your hypothesis.
Last edited:
They used to say that about the game of chess, then one day they stopped saying it.
Thanks for this important information Mac Rumors! Everyone run out and sell your shares of Apple.
Squirrel.
Sorry, to avoid getting frivolous comment, and risk removal, my expanded commentary simply implies the car must have either tried to avoid said squirrel or perhaps was being secretly driven by a dog and was attempting to go after it.
Sorry, to avoid getting frivolous comment, and risk removal, my expanded commentary simply implies the car must have either tried to avoid said squirrel or perhaps was being secretly driven by a dog and was attempting to go after it.
As much as I like being within the Apple ecosystem where everything is well integrated and works together making my daily life better, I have little trust or hopes for their cars and self-driving tech.
The way Apple realises features and updates we might see today's Tesla level of self-driving in maybe 10 years only. And I'm pretty sure it never will catch up anyways. Like it happens with Siri. Which is the closest AI thing we have and it's quiet and quite unimpressive. No matter how much improvement they made to her. She does very basic stuff, which sometimes is faster to do manually, but anything that would make her a centre of your smart home or an AI assistant seems beyond of her capabilities or even interests.
The minimalistic approach to realises and recycling designs promises us to see a car that will look the same and drive the same for many iterations with little incremental upgrades. Such an approach might be working in the already established Apple computer ecosystem but won't cut in the car market. Then imagine you'll want to change oil or do some other minor maintenance jobs. You'll have to go and visit an Apple Genius, that will charge you an arm and leg to put genuine oil and parts. But I hope Kia or Hyundai or whoever is going to be their car manufacture will have their input.
In the case when Apple proceeds to make their own cars, expect a car that will be akin to their current magic mouse. Looks sleek and cool, but has no doors and to charge it you have to lift the car and stick the charger from the bottom
The way Apple realises features and updates we might see today's Tesla level of self-driving in maybe 10 years only. And I'm pretty sure it never will catch up anyways. Like it happens with Siri. Which is the closest AI thing we have and it's quiet and quite unimpressive. No matter how much improvement they made to her. She does very basic stuff, which sometimes is faster to do manually, but anything that would make her a centre of your smart home or an AI assistant seems beyond of her capabilities or even interests.
The minimalistic approach to realises and recycling designs promises us to see a car that will look the same and drive the same for many iterations with little incremental upgrades. Such an approach might be working in the already established Apple computer ecosystem but won't cut in the car market. Then imagine you'll want to change oil or do some other minor maintenance jobs. You'll have to go and visit an Apple Genius, that will charge you an arm and leg to put genuine oil and parts. But I hope Kia or Hyundai or whoever is going to be their car manufacture will have their input.
In the case when Apple proceeds to make their own cars, expect a car that will be akin to their current magic mouse. Looks sleek and cool, but has no doors and to charge it you have to lift the car and stick the charger from the bottom
To be fair though, we started imagining chess playing machines about 200 years before we actually had the technology to do it properly...
Last edited:
if not millions & millions of years before the first AI started to copy brain functions
I don’t think that camera bump on top is big at all. Looks magical![]()
One of Apple's self-driving test vehicles was involved in a minor incident on September 27, according to a filing made with the California DMV [PDF].
![applelexusselfdriving1.jpg]()
The self-driving vehicle, which was operating in autonomous mode at the time, clipped a curb while going 13 miles per hour. There was no damage reported, but the car did require a realignment.The incident occurred when the vehicle was turning right from Mathilda Avenue onto Del Ray Avenue, a location that is right near Apple's Mathilda Avenue location.
Apple's self-driving vehicles have been involved in several very minor accidents, but most have been caused by other drivers and while not in autonomous mode. This is the second event that has occurred where an Apple vehicle was being operated in autonomous mode.
Apple has been testing its self-driving software since early 2017, using the aforementioned Lexus RX 450h vehicles outfitted with sensors and cameras in the area around its Cupertino campuses. The work on autonomous driving is part of Apple's longtime car project, and rumors suggest Apple is planning to release a vehicle in the mid to late 2020s.
Article Link: Apple Self-Driving Car Needed a Realignment After Clipping Curb in Autonomous Mode
Literally everything about driving is being reactive. Responding to other drivers and maintaining safe speeds and distances. You see congestion ahead? You react by slowing down. You see inclement weather? You react by slowing down. Emergency vehicle on the side of the road? You react by changing lanes.
Your story….however I can tell you I can see an extremely dangerous lane change that some idiot makes ahead or behind me and slow down before an accident potentially happens. You can tell a lot about someone just by observing their driving for a few seconds and often even by what they are driving. I know what half of the idiots around me are going to do before they do. It’s called instincts and being proactive. Something a computer will never do.
Self-driving...
To me, it would seem that only an idiot would assume that a 'computer' can drive a car better than they can. If you need a computer to drive for you, you really probably shouldn't be driving anywhere in the first place, and if you are that busy that the time pent driving is such a supreme waste of your time that you can't fathom doing it, then you need to either reevaluate your life, or demand your employer give you a driver to shuttle your precious bottom too and fro...
Our new-ish auto has 'speed sensing cruise control', and I have slightly less than zero faith that it could ever help me avoid an accident. The very fact that the system could reduce the speed of my vehicle quickly leaves its back end waving in the face of whoever, and whatever is driving the car behind me. The girl had a Navigator that was rear ended 4 times in a year! She was furious that people kept hitting it. It didn't help that I commented that it was so damn large, no one could ever miss it.
I harken back to that documentary of the Future Life Of Humans, The Jetsons, to show that even in that utopian future there were no driver-less vehicles. There were owner-less dog walkers, but no driver-less vehicles. (As I remember)
To paraphrase that obnoxious character from Jurassic Park, Dr Ian Malcolm: your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should... do it now.
But back to the article, I'm sure, since it's just an off the shelf car, they can get it repaired, and it's likely already back on the road already. But, like the Prius' that were backing over, and into people, there will be more incidents that will maim, injure, kill people. But a quick firmware update, and they wait for the next problem.
Putting so much power, the power being laziness, in people's hands is going to be interesting. It already has been. *shrug*
I really should try this fancy cruise control some day...
To me, it would seem that only an idiot would assume that a 'computer' can drive a car better than they can. If you need a computer to drive for you, you really probably shouldn't be driving anywhere in the first place, and if you are that busy that the time pent driving is such a supreme waste of your time that you can't fathom doing it, then you need to either reevaluate your life, or demand your employer give you a driver to shuttle your precious bottom too and fro...
Our new-ish auto has 'speed sensing cruise control', and I have slightly less than zero faith that it could ever help me avoid an accident. The very fact that the system could reduce the speed of my vehicle quickly leaves its back end waving in the face of whoever, and whatever is driving the car behind me. The girl had a Navigator that was rear ended 4 times in a year! She was furious that people kept hitting it. It didn't help that I commented that it was so damn large, no one could ever miss it.
I harken back to that documentary of the Future Life Of Humans, The Jetsons, to show that even in that utopian future there were no driver-less vehicles. There were owner-less dog walkers, but no driver-less vehicles. (As I remember)
To paraphrase that obnoxious character from Jurassic Park, Dr Ian Malcolm: your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should... do it now.
But back to the article, I'm sure, since it's just an off the shelf car, they can get it repaired, and it's likely already back on the road already. But, like the Prius' that were backing over, and into people, there will be more incidents that will maim, injure, kill people. But a quick firmware update, and they wait for the next problem.
Putting so much power, the power being laziness, in people's hands is going to be interesting. It already has been. *shrug*
I really should try this fancy cruise control some day...
Computers have a lot of advantages over humans when it comes to driving: they can see everywhere at once, they can see in the dark, they never get distracted by kids arguing in the back seat or urges to show off, they can have much faster reaction times, they can calculate F=ma to much higher precision trying to thread the needle between over and under reacting, they don't get drunk or fall asleep, and they're not likely to confuse the accelerator for the brake in a panic (though Tesla apparently still has some issues with this...).
They can also coordinate much better with other computers than people are ever willing to cooperate with other people, and improve traffic flows.
What computers lack is the ability to reason and adapt. They'll get there, but almost certainly not as soon as the evangelists think. Being able to drive suburban roads in Phoenix or Cupertino is a long way from solving the general problem.
The real justification for self driving cars isn't to give the driver some additional leisure time, it's to improve safety, traffic and energy efficiency. Worthy goals, but it's going to get worse before it gets better. We're also much more forgiving of people than we are of machines-- if I ask a friend for directions and they get it wrong, I react much differently than I do when Siri gets it wrong-- so they're going to have to do much better than people before we fully accept them.